hello,
I'm not an active member on S M forums, but this is a good thing, because people always came here when they got problems :) I usually use the search function and always find answers here. ;) I am using smf since 2007 an I can say it's the best free forum and has some very good mods.
There is no perfect software forum, and I have to say that for years I've been waiting a better handling of attachments, and after testing the 2.1 version I could say there were no big improovements for attachments.
Nowadays forums are not just text, but also imagesLet me explain it better, I own a few SMF forums, they're all dedicated to some autovehicle models. On my forums I got some tutorials, or step by step how to do, and using images at the end of posts is not a good idea. I encoureged members to use some external host for images and after years some of my important topics have no images because they were cancelled from sites like imageshack or similar.
I tried different forums software, Xenforum (yes, I own a license) and even free forums like kunena or mybb (and phpBB3) has a better handling for attachments. They all have from default:
- inline attachments
- auto-resize images (based on width or height of images)
- higlight effect on images
Xf has also a nice flash uploader from default, there is also a similar paid mod for SMF, but this is not so important.
Why I need all those functions?
1- inline attachments - are very usefull for topics like step by step, tuorials, garage, etc. There were different inline attachemnt mods, one of them has more than 33.000 downloads
2- Auto resize attachments: I saw that somebody else was asking for this, but it was rejected. you may see it here (http://www.simplemachines.org/community/index.php?topic=512171.0). Why is so important? Because nowadays most people are using cell phones to take pictures. My 2 years old android phone with 5mb camera is making photos with dimensions between 1,5-2MB per image. Well... hosting 2MB image at 3600px on a forum it has really nonsense and I bet that most of SMF forums are not allow to post 512Kb images Please don't tell me that people could use alternative software for resinzing images, because they won't do it. From default SMF has a limit to 192 Kb which is a real shame :-[ :-X
3- highlight effects: well this is not mandatatory, I can live without it, but I'm getting angry when even a forum like kunena has this by default.
One one forum I have to use: ILA attachemnts (https://github.com/Spuds/SMF-ILAl), Resize Attached Images (http://custom.simplemachines.org/mods/index.php?mod=2206), and HS4SMF (https://github.com/Spuds/SMF-HS4SMF) just to have a better handling for attachments.
Well using so much mods just for attachments it has no-sense. with inline atachments the images are not working from tapatalk and most of my users are asking for tapatalk. I also have the smf-media license, but it's not the same thing as tapatalk
So, when do we'll see a better images handling on SMF. One of my forums has just been converted to XF, I do not want to do the same thing with the others. Thank you
=== edit===
just some links corrected
We'll see major changes when someone with the free time and motivation gets around to implementing them. Emotional blackmail is not a good motivator in trying to get people who do things in their spare time for fun to do things for you.
Well Arantor I'm afraid you did not understand me well and I'm somehow disappointed. I use smf since 2007 and yes I love it, but on one of my forum most people are asking for these functions that all free forums software have from default . This was not an "motional blackmail" as you call, it was just a suggestion to make this software better. But if suggestions are not welcome you can close this thread or cancel it :-X
The reality is there are three people, in their free time, doing this. New features come along as we have the time to make them.
Then we have comments like:
QuoteSo, when do we'll see a better images handling on SMF. One of my forums has just been converted to XF, I do not want to do the same thing with the others. Thank you
This comes across as though you're trying to emotionally blackmail us into making it so you don't have to spend $140. Maybe that wasn't how it was intended, but that's how it came across.
Don't get me wrong, I respect what people are doing here, and are doing a great job. Re-reading my post could seem an "emotional blackmail" but it was not my intention.
one of inline attachments mod has more than 33.000 downloads, I think it's a discret number, and there were other similar mods. I would like to know what the other users think about this kind of mod, it's a mod that I am the only one who's asking for?
p.s. I did not spend 140€, it was an used and just renewed license boght for 75€. 2 of my moderators contributed.
Quoteone of inline attachments mod has more than 33.000 downloads
http://custom.simplemachines.org/mods/index.php?mod=1179 - 33,000 downloads since 2008. There are mods that have been around less time and earned more downloads - and still not getting put into the core.
We'd have to rewrite it from scratch in any case.
There is also the ILA mod made by spuds which is on github, works well and it's updated. I don't know what kind of licence has and if it can be included on smf by default.
At this point I would really like to know what the other users are thinking, maybe it's not so requested mod as can seem to me :(
The resize mod for images is working fine, even if last update is from 2010, I am using it from a few years and I did not have any kind of problems with it, even using it together with other mods.
Look, like the Dev said, it is NOT going to be made into SMF's core.
I do not understand this continual arguing about what has already been debated and rejected.
At a later time, it may be, but as stated, not now, as there are 3 devs that have their hands full as it is doing what needs to be done, not what people want and say they'll buy paid if not done.
Hi BK and thanks for answering. On the other topic it was requested the resize mod, I already said that I can leave without it, the actual mod is working fine even with the other mods.
My mistake was to mention a paid forum here, I know I was wrong :(
What I don't understand is how come phpBB, mybb and even kunnena has those mods builtin and here on smf nobody asks for them
My question to you, then: if those other platforms serve your needs better, why not use them?
I have absolutely no problem telling a user to move to another platform if it will serve their needs better. Especially as trying to cater to everyone's needs is a guaranteed recipe for failure.
As I said before arantor, it's not so easy to move after you use a software for 7 years, it's not my intention to do it. I have 4 smf forums, I did not start this topic saying that I love smf just to get a better handling of attachments :) I start it because after all these years using it and after testing the 2.1 version I see that were not made great improvements on attachments side.
I do not want to transform this topic on a comparison between forum software. I start my first forum on phpBB back in 2005, a big mistake and I'll never use it. I love Joomla and kunena, but is a headache running both, mybb does not have all the smf plugins. The all 3 sw are not offering the simplicity of smf.
I am a normal user on an old forum, a niche forum with 500 users and more than 120.000 posts, I could say it's an active forum. I convinced the admin to switch it from the old php nuke to smf. He was also impressed by the power and simplicity of smf and simple portal. We would like to find a solution for images inline possibly compatible with Tapatalk.
If we won't find it, we'll just use the mobile theme from smf media which I already got
See, that's the thing... if you'd just said what it was you wanted - without trying to compare it to other platforms, you'd have gotten a much more positive response. Comparing to other platforms to spotlight a failing is not the way to argue for a feature, it just makes us suggest you go elsewhere.
Don't worry, I won't go elsewhere, you won't get rid of me so quick :) it was not the best way doing a request or making a suggestion comparing smf to other forums especially paid ones. Sorry for that, and thanks for understanding.
I really like to know what other smf users think about the attachments on smf
So do I because if there's a significant demand, I'll implement it.
Personally, I am of the belief that = if you intend to use the forum for images, then add a gallery script/mod and handle it that way.
Using the attachments as a gallery is a poor way to do it...
There is an argument for using attachments in the body of a post when you're doing it occasionally and don't need a gallery, e.g. an announcement or similar where you want the image inlined into the body of the page. Heck, I've done that in the past, but I deliberately didn't use a gallery mod - or attachments - but uploaded the images directly to the server with a custom lightbox bbcode to handle preview/full size. But then again it was part of a blog conversion ;)
I use HighSlide and upload my images to my sites. Easiest way in my opinion.
Oh, I can see the occasional call for it... but the "need" is generally expressed as "I run my forum with a whole ton of images, which is why I need this."
And that's usually why it's needed. But that's not to say it's a need we should necessarily ignore just because it doesn't fit our preconceived notions of how people should use our software.
Quote from: Kindred on November 23, 2013, 12:01:43 AM
Personally, I am of the belief that = if you intend to use the forum for images, then add a gallery script/mod and handle it that way.
Using the attachments as a gallery is a poor way to do it...
Sooo... SMF can be a blog, but not a gallery? :P
Hover over some of the topic titles in this board (http://chalkcat.com/index.php?board=11.0). ILA in conjunction with Nice Tooltips makes for a fabulous effect when the picture is placed first in the post, as my co-admin discovered when she started posting events on ChalkCat ;)
I love ILA and use it with Fancy Box. I don't want a gallery, none of our members would use a gallery, we just want to be able to position images where we want within posts. That said, I don't mind whether it's in core or a mod as long as the functionality is there. I can see that for many forums there may be no requirement for inline attachments.
Finaly someone who's thinking like me ;)
I do not want to use a gallery, specially now that Aeva is not updated for years. I don't know if it will be updated and there is also no release date for wedge. There are other galleries but are not offering the same functions as aeva. For something similar I should use paid a paid gallery.
None of free galleries has autoresize for images, and as I say first nobody will resize them first. People are used to download photos from phones, cameras and publish them like on Facebook.
Nice to know that my posts are being taken into consideration.
Quote from: Arantor on November 23, 2013, 12:25:22 AM
There is an argument for using attachments in the body of a post when you're doing it occasionally and don't need a gallery, e.g. an announcement or similar where you want the image inlined into the body of the page. Heck, I've done that in the past, but I deliberately didn't use a gallery mod - or attachments - but uploaded the images directly to the server with a custom lightbox bbcode to handle preview/full size. But then again it was part of a blog conversion ;)
Quote from: Arantor on November 23, 2013, 01:03:49 AM
And that's usually why it's needed. But that's not to say it's a need we should necessarily ignore just because it doesn't fit our preconceived notions of how people should use our software.
Translation: I've found a need for it in the past, I don't entirely agree with the view being put forth that it is out of the realms of what SMF could do, I'm just trying to find the evidence that it's worth MY time and energy to figure it out and implement it in the core, since it takes little effort to make a suggestion and considerably more effort to implement.
But I guess unless I spell it out, multiple times, I'm not being listened to. Seems completely consistent with everything else going on.
Ok, if I understand well you did it uploading images directly to ftp and embed images with bbcode IMG ? Ok, I also used in the past an utility (http://elfinder.org/) to upload and resize images to my host, but as not being integrated with SMF only I could use it. Not all users. On forum I am not the only one who write the tutorials, there are also other members that write them
I did, but it would not be suitable for general use, I just did it that way to save a massive, massive amount of performance.
But the point stands, I'm not disagreeing with you. I never actually disagreed with you about the need for this. I just wanted you to provide me with sufficient evidence that it's worth my time (and going 'because platform x has it' is not), and I resent the fact that only now you're going 'finally someone's thinking like me' when I already thought about it.
Sorry Arantor, but I don't understand well what you're trying to say. My english is very "basic" , I read a few times your last post and used G translate but ... :( You're saying that you are not agree with me and there is no need to implement theese mods in smf because the evidences I gave were not enough?
I did not want to offend you when I said "someone is thinking like me", I read your post, so was not reffered to you or somebody else
QuoteSo do I because if there's a significant demand, I'll implement it.
--edit--
Here http://goo.gl/TOA8TU you can find a tutorial write by one of my moderator. I modified it and upload all images to my ftp. It will be much easier for me to do it with inline attachments and image autoresized than the way I did it
Quote from: radu81 on November 23, 2013, 08:34:50 AM
Finaly someone who's thinking like me ;)
I do not want to use a gallery, specially now that Aeva is not updated for years. I don't know if it will be updated and there is also no release date for wedge. There are other galleries but are not offering the same functions as aeva. For something similar I should use paid a paid gallery.
None of free galleries has autoresize for images, and as I say first nobody will resize them first. People are used to download photos from phones, cameras and publish them like on Facebook.
You didn't look very hard then, as Coppermine most certainly does have automatic image resizing...
And my post wasn't to be taken as siding with anybody. I clearly stated that I don't care about inline attachments being in SMF core. I'm happy that I have my mod, so I don't see a problem with things just the way they are.
Your post and your forum is surely useful for me because I see you are using inline attachments and images are also visible from Tapatalk. On my forum I only see broken images from Tapatalk when using inline images. Are you using the ILA mod by spuds or attachments in message mod?
I'll ask on Tapatalk forum, but a few months ago they said they won't support ILA mod
Spuds' one :)
This topic = good read. Agree that the inline pictures would be nice (= great) to have as a built-in feature, but understand the workload on the developers.
ftm am testing Spuds mod, works fine so far (mainly tech forum here, lots of pictures).
Ive always just uploaded them like normal... Submitted the post.. Copied the image url... And modified my original posting using the img tag and the link from the newly uploaded image...
Or am I missing something here?
Nothing except the relative inelegance.
Elegant.... No its not...
Functional... You betcha! :-)
+1 from me about these suggestions.
For some forums, like hobby, electronics, machining etc., the pictures are a very big and important part of the description that the members try to present.
Let's say that we have to describe the build of a device, that it has lot of details. Most of times, this will needs at least 10 pictures in one post, to make others see your work and understand about what are you talking about.
If the pictures open like with the Highslide, then it's nice and easy to see them, but if you have just the default system, this is not comfort at all and you start feeling boring to open them one by one. Also sometimes it is nice to watching the photos without need to open them, as it is happening with the ILA, that you can put them into the post in big size and make it looks like a tutorial, with several pictures one under the other and with some description between them, as you analyze your work.
Something else that it would be handy too, is the youtube video links to could be placed as is at the editor and then after posting it, to open the video window without need to use bbcode or extra buttons. For us that we know some things about forums, this seems not important, but you can't imagine how many users are keep asking us about how to do this.. There are a lot of people out there that they don't understand and they ask always how to put youtube links...
Anyway, what I try to say is, these requirements are not because we want our forums to be glamorous. If you see this from the side of the simple user, these things are important for the correct funtionality of a community that it has the need of the attachments at the posts.
I can't imagine a forum about machinists, that someone needs help about how to unscrew for example his lathe machine and that the members will have to explain him just with words, or he must describe them how his lathe seems, because for ex. it is difficult to upload 10 pictures at once..
Pictures=1000 words, right? It has nothing to do with elegant and if you want SMF to be on top again, you have to fight for it and improve some things and you must know that we are here and we will continue to support you.
I understand that you try hard about this project all these years and whatever you do it takes a lot of your free time, but isn't it a pity to leave a so many years work to fade out and stay behind of the competition with the pass of time?
Just my 2 cents as you say in America :)
Every feature that gets added delays the release... that's why I need justification that it's worth my time and worth delaying the release for.
To indulge in a spot of necromancy, inline attached images would be great. I've got a few small forums for game and airsoft related shenanigans, and most of the time we want to have images, we want them inlined in specific places in the main text of the post so they're immediately relevant. Sure, we can host them elsewhere and just use image tags (which is what we usually do), but that puts the images at the mercy of random image boards, so useful threads tend to decay by themselves over time as images get deleted. :(
It would definitely be a good thing to be included as a "core" feature in future releases, but I understand the devs probably have their plates full with other things. It's more of a usability/quality of life thing, it'd make the forums feel significantly nicer to use (at least for people like me) without being a critical issue.
For a mod that can do the same thing, any suggestions? I've seen ILA suggested above but the thread here leads to a dead download link - am I doing it wrong, or does anyone have alternative suggestions for a mod that'll sort me out and work in 2.0.7? :)
https://github.com/Spuds/SMF-ILA
Quote from: Kindred on March 29, 2014, 04:03:48 PM
https://github.com/Spuds/SMF-ILA
Aha, thanks very much! ;D
Personally I would love ILA and to be able to use it with Fancy Box, like CheekyCat.
Problem is it doesn't seem to be available for smf 2.0.x (I'm using 2.0.7)
I have been searching for options for positioning images within the post body instead of just leaving them as a block at the bottom of the post.
This would be of great use to me if it was brought up to date and made compatible with smf 2.0.x
Thanks for all your hard work guys.
did you even go to the link that I posted just above? That is ILA - which works on 2.0.x
I didn't have time to read through every single post within this topic, but I do agree with the topic's author that in-line attachments are a necessity. I had a phpBB3 board for a few years and like most other forum software out there in-line attachment are built in standard feature. Honestly, having it built-in is a no brainier...
Anyway, not trying to take sides, but the reason I switched to SMF from phpbb3 is because phpBB3 was a big resource hog and it was always an issue when on a shared server. I really miss not having some of it's standard features though like the in-line attachments.
QuoteHonestly, having it built-in is a no brainier...
You'd think so, wouldn't you? But no, it isn't. Not when you're dealing with a project that exemplifies a conservative approach to development.
Additionally, what some consider a no brainer, other consider and unneeded feature... And vice versa...
After all, there are many things that I consider "no brainers" that people continually do wrong... :p
One thing I will say though is as far as attachment handling is concerned, mainly with photos is that SMF does create the different sizes so when a user clicks on a topic the pages loads don't take forever like they do with phpBB3. So in that regard it is much better. With phpBB3 it downloads the entire big file size of every single attached photo with every page load :-X
But here's the thing. A case has been made. Look at the case on its merits, there's certainly a strong case for change to improve the way SMF does something. But it's one of those things that 'there's nothing wrong with how it is therefore no need to change it' even when it can definitely be improved.
Well, I don't see the need for it, but I am generally willing to consider some things.., although when people start harping on things and calling them no brainers and other commentary like that, my argumentative side kicks in and I tend to disagree just on principle... ;)
That's where you and I differ. If someone's calling it a no-brainer, I want to know what logic is in place that makes them arrive at that conclusion. I want to see how they got to that point, and put myself in their place and see if I agree.
Well, certain types of forums out there like mine for example having the ability to place pics or files in-line is really helpful and useful. You write a paragraph referenced to a photo, drawing or a file, then place that attachment below the paragraph, then below that start another paragraph with another attachment. It's better than having the reader needing to look through all of the attached photos or files at the very bottom of the post and determine which one is which. It's mainly about the presentation.
And there are options for doing it with an add-on.
Quote from: Arantor on May 20, 2014, 10:31:47 PM
And there are options for doing it with an add-on.
What add-on?
I searched around here and all I found was a coupe of outdated mods that had to be used together, but they were for a really old version of SMF like 1.x?
The one mentioned earlier in this very thread called Inline Attachments...
Quote from: Arantor on May 20, 2014, 11:05:56 PM
The one mentioned earlier in this very thread called Inline Attachments...
That's back from 2009 and needs work for SMF 2.0.7 compatibility. Someone realized there was a need for it so what happened?
Anyway, it still should be a standard built-in SMF feature just like being able to send attachments in PM's. There' a small handful of things like that coming to mind.
Later...
I'm sorry, did you actually read this thread? Bottom of page 2 (i.e. a few posts up from this one, really), there's a link to the Inline Attachments mod, as currently maintained - it hasn't changed in a year because it doesn't need to, it works fine on 2.0.7. Link: https://github.com/Spuds/SMF-ILA
I was kind of hoping that you'd take a little initiative seeing how I pointed it out as being in this thread :(
Attachments in PMs is not a standard feature because it's a legal minefield to deal with.
I started this topic a few months ago, because I had some problems with Tapatalk and Inline Images. After all I saw that usually most problems came from Tapatalk. I unistalled Tapatalk because it brings more problems than advantages.
I could mark this topic as solved: the resize images mod works fine with smf 2.0.7 even if the mod is not updated and works also well with ILA and HS4SMF (Spuds mods). Using the mobile template from smf-media all mods works together fine. There is no difference for me using 3 mods to handle better the attachments rather than have them in the core.
In understand Arantor and the other developers, so it's better to not have them in the core and let the developers work on the new 2.1 version. I hope that the three mods will be also updated to 2.1. Everybody knows that most forums like mybb, kunena, xf.. etc have inline & resize attachments in the core but why loosing time and resources to include them in the core when the mods works well? ;)
Quote from: Arantor on May 20, 2014, 11:58:19 PM
I'm sorry, did you actually read this thread? Bottom of page 2 (i.e. a few posts up from this one, really), there's a link to the In-line Attachments mod, as currently maintained - it hasn't changed in a year because it doesn't need to, it works fine on 2.0.7. Link: https://github.com/Spuds/SMF-ILA
I was kind of hoping that you'd take a little initiative seeing how I pointed it out as being in this thread :(
Attachments in PMs is not a standard feature because it's a legal minefield to deal with.
I did, I download it last night and there were several errors during the test install so I didn't install it.
Anyway, that also brings up another important question I pointed out in one of my previous posts. If it was working for 2.0.7 then how does that mod handle and embed the attachments in a post say like photos? Will it place the largest full size photo in the post or will it place the thumbnail size to where if you click on it the next larger sizes start to come up just like if it wasn't placed in-line? That's an important issue because if will greatly effect page loads. One thing SMF has over the other forum SW packages is that it is very efficient in that regard and the same principle needs to be used for photos when they are placed in-line. If it was part of standard SMF install package then you would think those same principles would be maintained, right?
Not sure what you mean about the attachments in PM's being a legal issue?
Just the other day a member sent me a PM and I needed to send him a pdf file and I had to create a topic so he could download it from there which was nutz because I couldn't reply with it attached to the PM.
If you did, how come you started talking about a mod from 2009 when it clearly wasn't?
As for attachments in PMs being a legal issue, of course it is. The site owner is legally responsible for all content on the site. Including PMs. It would not be difficult for members to share illegal material between each other, where you have no ability to view it or vet it, or remove it if it is found to be illegal.
And before you get into 'but that's only hypothetical', I know of 3 sites where this has happened, where highly illegal material was shared between members and the admins didn't know about it until they were questioned by police for enabling such material to be shared. (And no, DMCA Safe Harbour is not a protection in this case either; that's only for site owner's protection against copyright infringement, not more serious matters.)
Quote from: Arantor on May 21, 2014, 11:09:33 AM
If you did, how come you started talking about a mod from 2009 when it clearly wasn't?
I was looking at this mod: http://custom.simplemachines.org/mods/index.php?mod=1179
Is that not the one? Maybe I went to the wrong one. Actually the one above is from 2008 and was last updated in 2010. I said 2009 so I must have looked at it wrong.
As far as attachments in PM's are concerned, isn't that the responsibility of the site owner and not the forum SW creators? All you need is a disclaimer.
P.S. Police :o I would think you meant FBI. The local police would have nothing to do with those matters.
No, it's not the one. Like I said, had you read this thread, you'd have found the link I specifically pointed out which is the Inline Attachments mod.
And while yes it's the responsibility of the site owner, the direction of the software team historically has been to not get involved in such things, especially as there is a mod for it.
As for police vs FBI, that presumes the offences happened in the US. They didn't happen in the US. The three sites I mentioned were based in the UK where we don't have an FBI and such matters are the jurisdiction of the police.
Quote from: Arantor on May 21, 2014, 11:33:33 AM
No, it's not the one. Like I said, had you read this thread, you'd have found the link I specifically pointed out which is the Inline Attachments mod.
Well, as I had stated in my very first post...
Quote from: W5HRO on May 20, 2014, 09:28:15 PM
I didn't have time to read through every single post within this topic, but I do agree with the topic's author that in-line attachments are a necessity. I had a phpBB3 board for a few years and like most other forum software out there in-line attachment are built in standard feature. Honestly, having it built-in is a no brainier...
Quote from: Arantor on May 21, 2014, 11:33:33 AM
And while yes it's the responsibility of the site owner, the direction of the software team historically has been to not get involved in such things, especially as there is a mod for it.
Which PM mod? The one from they guy in Russia? If so that one wont currently work with 2.0.7 either.
I'll check out the other In-Line attachment mod, but what about my previous question below?
QuoteAnyway, that also brings up another important question I pointed out in one of my previous posts. If it was working for 2.0.7 then how does that mod handle and embed the attachments in a post say like photos? Will it place the largest full size photo in the post or will it place the thumbnail size to where if you click on it the next larger sizes start to come up just like if it wasn't placed in-line? That's an important issue because if will greatly effect page loads. One thing SMF has over the other forum SW packages is that it is very efficient in that regard and the same principle needs to be used for photos when they are placed in-line. If it was part of standard SMF install package then you would think those same principles would be maintained, right?
Which is why I specifically even then linked it for you. But since you're not reading my posts, I think we're done here.
First of all I have read every post down from where I first posted after I found this topic and quickly read through bits and parts of it. Your post from last night only said "Inline Attachments" so I did a search based on that. Then your other post today gave a link which I went to right away and I thought it was the same mod. Second of all I just tried that other mod and there are install problems with it as well.
I think everyone fully understands that this is free forum software and that volunteers are contributing to it in their spare time and that's a great thing. Unfortunately, your responses comes across like someone just trying to pass the buck elsewhere. That's pretty much the overall response this topic has received.
Anyway, not trying to cause trouble, but Inline attachments are in fact a useful and often necessary feature with many forums. It would be nice if it was added and maintained as a standard feature so it works correctly and not be a resource hog like phpBB3 and other forum software by slowing down page loads, etc. Many users would greatly benefit from it.
That's my final two cents worth...
for inline images you may use this mod https://github.com/Spuds/SMF-ILA like Arantor said.
I am using it on 3 SMF forums, it's still supported and works well with SMF 2.0.7. No errors during install
Quote from: radu81 on May 21, 2014, 01:54:27 PM
for inline images you may use this mod https://github.com/Spuds/SMF-ILA like Arantor said.
I am using it on 3 SMF forums, it's still supported and works well with SMF 2.0.7. No errors during install
It doesn't work on mine, several install errors...
Anyway, the point being if it was already part of SMF there wouldn't be a need for all of this, right?
Later...
The point, which was made multiple times in this thre-- oh. Well, anyway. The developers are not against the idea, there are simply more important things for them to be doing and more significant interest would have been required to justify pushing the next version back even further. Mind you, conservatism is a huge part of the team's developmental ethos and some of the things in 2.1 wouldn't have been there if I hadn't just pretty much ignored the rest of the team to implement them in the first place. At the time I wasn't against the idea, as this thread shows. I just needed more justification. These days, I don't see it as my problem, just my place to point out that it is a good idea and why it should be included.
Quote from: Arantor on May 21, 2014, 03:17:24 PM
The point, which was made multiple times in this thre-- oh. Well, anyway. The developers are not against the idea, there are simply more important things for them to be doing and more significant interest would have been required to justify pushing the next version back even further. Mind you, conservatism is a huge part of the team's developmental ethos and some of the things in 2.1 wouldn't have been there if I hadn't just pretty much ignored the rest of the team to implement them in the first place. At the time I wasn't against the idea, as this thread shows. I just needed more justification. These days, I don't see it as my problem, just my place to point out that it is a good idea and why it should be included.
Well, the in-line attachments thing is about the only thing I can see in this topic that would be worth while adding because people do use it. All of the other stuff requested like auto-resizing, etc. would be a cumbersome task and add nothing but fluff. The PM attachment thing though is a separate issue all together.
One of the first things I did when switching to SMF was search for the in-line and PM attachments mods and I was really disappointed to find what was there was somewhat outdated. Those are two main features I myself really hate no longer having, because they were both used extensively. I know I'm not alone in this either.
Just don't always be so critical when someone has a request or makes a suggestion. There may be more people out there who just never get in here and post or say anything. That doesn't mean the request or idea is not valid.
Yet again, not reading the posts. I'm not critical of the suggestion. I wasn't in any way against the inclusion of inline attachments. If you'd bothered to read the posts, you'd understand this. It just wasn't as important as the other stuff. SMF 2.1 is already almost 3 years old and still not released. At least 6 months delay was introduced by the things I did because I thought they were important; this is another thing that would have added at least a week's delay if not more to introduce (since mods and core code behave quite differently in practice)
I wanted to be sure before adding it that it was worth my time to implement, test, debug, test, retest and final debug, when only a few people were saying that they actually wanted it.
I'd ask you not to be so critical of me but it's kind of hard to discuss the matter with someone who is clearly only seeing what they want to see and damn everything else.
Try to post the errors, I'm sure it's some kind of conflict with other mods. The ILA mod Is not outdated
Quote from: Arantor on May 21, 2014, 03:40:33 PM
I'd ask you not to be so critical of me but it's kind of hard to discuss the matter with someone who is clearly only seeing what they want to see and damn everything else.
I have been reading all the posts from when I started posting yesterday on from there. However, I did state up front that I didn't read all of post within the topic before I started. I read the first few posts then quickly scanned thought the rest here and there and I got the jest of it. Some of these topics spread over the span of a few years and I don't have the time to read every single post.
Anyway, it's not really any big deal, but to me it looked like the topic author was jumped on pretty quick in the beginning even when they stated repeatedly that it wasn't their intention. That sort of set the tone for the topic in the beginning. Not everyone has the time to read every post and maybe the tone had change somewhat over time, but at first glance it didn't come across that way. That's why I said up front I hadn't read all of them in case I missed something.
Again, it's no big deal...
Quote from: radu81 on May 21, 2014, 04:22:53 PM
Try to post the errors, I'm sure it's some kind of conflict with other mods. The ILA mod Is not outdated
I will need to install part of it manually on the testing server first, its in the subs.php file. I do have other mods so that could be why. I also have highslide installed too so we will see what happens. My main concern is how it embeds photos. If it works with highslide then maybe it does embed the thumbnails. I wont use it if it doesn't.
I was able to install the in-line attachment mod, but it's not what I need or want, plus my highslide install would need some additional modifications because it didn't work when pics were placed inline, only when left at the end as ordinary attachments.
The main issue is the fact you cannot make attachments already uploaded inline. It's a one shot deal for new uploads only. What it needs are check boxes beside each attachment already uploaded that you can check with a "place in-line" button. Maybe the same "Uncheck the attachments you no longer want attached:" box could be used for both things.
Anyway, it was worth a shot, but that mod won't work for me so I already uninstalled it. Without the ability to place attachments in-line or back out-of line without deleting and re-uploading them it's a deal breaker.
Hope this feedback helps..
no mod or feature will ever change the old attachments... every mod is going to be "from this moment forward"
Even if we implemented it as a feature in the new version, it would not insert them inline for old posts.
QuoteI also have highslide installed too so we will see what happens.
I don't know what highslide mod you are using, but if you use the HS4SMF mod from Spuds (https://github.com/Spuds/SMF-HS4SMF) I can confirm that both mods works well toghether. You can check them in the homepage of my 2 websites in my signature
QuoteIf it works with highslide then maybe it does embed the thumbnails
It does
QuoteThe main issue is the fact you cannot make attachments already uploaded inline.
You can, you only need to place the code where you want to embed them. In the same way other scripts works, even paid like XF.
Quote from: radu81 on May 22, 2014, 02:31:16 AM
QuoteI also have highslide installed too so we will see what happens.
I don't know what highslide mod you are using, but if you use the HS4SMF mod from Spuds (https://github.com/Spuds/SMF-HS4SMF) I can confirm that both mods works well toghether. You can check them in the homepage of my 2 websites in my signature
I'm using the Highslide mod that was available in the modification section of this site so that's probably why and I had to modify it a little to make it work like I wanted it to. Mainly by modifying the index.template.php file and replaciing the highslide.css file completely. Now it works great, but that mod is probably missing the code where its needs to be for the inline attachments mod. Any ideas on where to put it? It would take me a little while to manually uninstall it and replace it with the one via your link.
Quote from: radu81 on May 22, 2014, 02:31:16 AM
QuoteIf it works with highslide then maybe it does embed the thumbnails
It does
Yeah, I saw that right away where you could embed the full file size or the thumbnail. I honestly don't see why anyone would want to ever embed the full size file. That's what phpBB3 does and why its such a resource hog and makes page loads take forever :P
Quote from: radu81 on May 22, 2014, 02:31:16 AM
QuoteThe main issue is the fact you cannot make attachments already uploaded inline.
You can, you only need to place the code where you want to embed them. In the same way other scripts works, even paid like XF.
Can you give me an example? One thing I noticed is it looks like it creates funky file names. I went into the Attachment Integrity Check feature and when I ran it some weird file id names came up.
QuoteNow it works great, but that mod is probably missing the code where its needs to be for the inline attachments mod. Any ideas on where to put it? It would take me a little while to manually uninstall it and replace it with the one via your link.
never used that mod, so cannot help. You may ask in the support topic of that mod
QuoteYeah, I saw that right away where you could embed the full file size or the thumbnail. I honestly don't see why anyone would want to ever embed the full size file. That's what phpBB3 does and why its such a resource hog and makes page loads take foreve
My forum is a small one, it has almost 10 years and less than 400 users. It will never grow up much, the market for hyundai sports cars is very small in Italy. So I'm not worry to embed full images. Take a look at this topic sharkracingclub.it/index.php?topic=2245.0 . It has 5 inline images and it loads in 0.179 seconds. For me it's good enough. I have also the mod Resize Attached Images (http://custom.simplemachines.org/mods/index.php?mod=2206) which resize all images at 1024px width.
For the last question take a look on how ILA mod works. You can choose how to insert inline images (thumbnail, full, link) and the mod automaticaly insert the bbcode
QuoteAdd an inline attachment
Example:
[attachimg=1 align=left width=400]
This will show a left-aligned image resized to 400 pixels wide with the post text flowing around it. Execpt for the attachment tag and its number all other parameters are optional
[attach=1]
This will show the attachment as a thumbnail if available, if no thumbnail is available it will use a full sized image. The image will be in line with the text of your post.
Options:
attach=x, attachimg=x, attachurl=x, attachmini=x where x is the attachment number
align=left, center, right
width=### (number in pixels)
Modes available
You can choose the inline mode you want for your attachment:
Thumbnail [attach=x] Your image will be shown as a thumbnail
Full-size Image [attachimg=x] Your image will be shown using its full dimensions up to the viewing size allowed by the forum. Images larger than the viewing size allowed by the forum will be displayed at the forum maximum and be click-able to full size
Text Link [attachurl=x] Only a link is show with size and view details. By clicking on it, the image is displayed.
Short Text Link [attachmini=x] Only a link is shown without any details. By clicking on it, the image is displayed.
You can choose how to align the inline image:
align=left The image is aligned to the left and the text will flow around it
align=right The image is aligned to the right and the text will flow around it
align=center The image is centered and the text will be below it
You can choose how wide to show the image:
width=123 The image is displayed 123pixels wide
If the width specified is larger than the image or larger than the forum allows the largest allowable width will be used
Can be used to shrink a thumbnail as well [attach=1 width=50] will display a 50px wide thumbnail
How to use it?
Step 1 :
In the file selection, select the attachment file you want to upload;
Step 2 :
Select the inline mode, if any, you want using the list box "Inline modes";
Step 3 :
Repeat the steps for each attachment you want to upload. Move and edit the tags in the message body to suit your needs.
Quote from: Kindred on May 22, 2014, 01:01:46 AM
no mod or feature will ever change the old attachments... every mod is going to be "from this moment forward"
Even if we implemented it as a feature in the new version, it would not insert them in line for old posts.
Is that because it would not be able to tell which file size is which with uploaded attachments (photos) already there?
I quickly played around and was able to embed a photo with the below just to see what would happen. It was embedding image number 183. Of course 183 is only 1 of the 3 sizes of that same photo. Is it because it wouldn't be able to tell that there are 3 different photos of that same photo? Would the mod add additional or different charters to the file names to newly uploaded photos that the old ones wouldn't have?
I'm trying to understand the issue.
[img]http://my_domain.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=51.0;attach=183;image[/img]
The issue is that the mod only changes the code for future inputs...
To change the old stuff, it would have to go through every message in the database, find every attachment, then process every attachment to see if it fit the "inline requirements" and then query you on what to do with inserting those attachments
In other words, a HUGE amount of work... especially on a forum with any large number of posts and/or attachments
Pah, don't let a little thing like reality get in the way, will you?
Quote from: radu81 on May 22, 2014, 10:51:05 AM
For the last question take a look on how ILA mod works. You can choose how to insert in-line images (thumbnail, full, link) and the mod automatically insert the bbcode
QuoteAdd an inline attachment
Example:
[attachimg=1 align=left width=400]
This will show a left-aligned image resized to 400 pixels wide with the post text flowing around it. Execpt for the attachment tag and its number all other parameters are optional
[attach=1]
This will show the attachment as a thumbnail if available, if no thumbnail is available it will use a full sized image. The image will be in line with the text of your post.
Options:
attach=x, attachimg=x, attachurl=x, attachmini=x where x is the attachment number
align=left, center, right
width=### (number in pixels)
Modes available
You can choose the inline mode you want for your attachment:
Thumbnail [attach=x] Your image will be shown as a thumbnail
Full-size Image [attachimg=x] Your image will be shown using its full dimensions up to the viewing size allowed by the forum. Images larger than the viewing size allowed by the forum will be displayed at the forum maximum and be click-able to full size
Text Link [attachurl=x] Only a link is show with size and view details. By clicking on it, the image is displayed.
Short Text Link [attachmini=x] Only a link is shown without any details. By clicking on it, the image is displayed.
You can choose how to align the inline image:
align=left The image is aligned to the left and the text will flow around it
align=right The image is aligned to the right and the text will flow around it
align=center The image is centered and the text will be below it
You can choose how wide to show the image:
width=123 The image is displayed 123pixels wide
If the width specified is larger than the image or larger than the forum allows the largest allowable width will be used
Can be used to shrink a thumbnail as well [attach=1 width=50] will display a 50px wide thumbnail
How to use it?
Step 1 :
In the file selection, select the attachment file you want to upload;
Step 2 :
Select the inline mode, if any, you want using the list box "Inline modes";
Step 3 :
Repeat the steps for each attachment you want to upload. Move and edit the tags in the message body to suit your needs.
Yes, but my question was can you place old attachments (photos) in-line that were already there before you installed the mod? Are you saying that once you install the mod you can just enter the code manually within a post to manually link those old photos and the attach=1 attach=2 will automatically recognize those old files with the different sizes? Anyway, that's what I'm trying to find out. Something just doesn't sound right...
It seems to me if it were possible to do there would be a much easier way of doing it instead of using that mod and even for new uploads as well. A simple "place-inline" button beside each file upload box with the ability to press that button to upload the file before submitting the post itself. You place the cursor in the post where you want the file/image to appear and press "place in-line' and it uploads the file. Then when you are done you submit the post. At the same time you could go back if you wanted and place an attached file in-line if you didn't already do it or forgot. It shouldn't require manually entering any code. Only manually deleting code to remove the file from in-line to where it then appears at the bottom of the post like normal attachments.
Quote from: Kindred on May 22, 2014, 12:41:43 PM
The issue is that the mod only changes the code for future inputs...
To change the old stuff, it would have to go through every message in the database, find every attachment, then process every attachment to see if it fit the "inline requirements" and then query you on what to do with inserting those attachments
In other words, a HUGE amount of work... especially on a forum with any large number of posts and/or attachments
Right, but I wasn't saying the mod should automatically change every attachments that's already there. That would be stupid even if you could make it work. There are a few posts already in my forums that I would like to be able to go back and place some of the images in-line. At the same time after the mod being able to go back an place in-line new attachments already there if and when necessary without having to delete and then re-uploading them again to do it.
I think we were just not on the same page...
(and this is why implementing it in core is nowhere near the simple task people think it is and why complex testing is required - and why a suitable amount of 'is this actually necessary' needs to be asked first because of the effort required)
Quote from: Arantor on May 22, 2014, 01:10:56 PM
(and this is why implementing it in core is nowhere near the simple task people think it is and why complex testing is required - and why a suitable amount of 'is this actually necessary' needs to be asked first because of the effort required)
Yeah, I agree...
My problem is I got spoiled with the other SW package and now with SMF those features are gone. It's like having cable or satellite TV and then going back to an antenna with only local channels. Some things you take for granted until they are gone.
I like SMF better because its way more efficient, but there should be an easier way to add the feature like I mentioned without making it complex.
If only everything were as simple as people imagine it to be. Sadly it's not. This is the point I have been repeatedly trying to make.
my only concern about this mods is when version 2.1 will came out. Who knows if the mods will be updated or compatible with 2.1?!?
Quote from: radu81 on May 22, 2014, 02:37:17 PM
my only concern about this mods is when version 2.1 will came out. Who knows if the mods will be updated or compatible with 2.1?!?
I really don't have any plans to upgrade to 2.1 believe it or not. I did that with phpBB3 and after spending lots of time tweaking each version to make it work like I wanted it to I wound up starting over from scratch again because I couldn't just overwrite the files because of the mods and the changes I made. It's not worth it. The only time you really need to upgrade is when browsers advance with drastic changes after several years and you start having compatibility issues. Example being IE :P Then it's time to bite the bullet and upgrade. I'm just going to make 2.0.7 work as well as I can for now and be done with it.
Quote from: Arantor on May 22, 2014, 02:32:50 PM
If only everything were as simple as people imagine it to be. Sadly it's not. This is the point I have been repeatedly trying to make.
I didn't say it would be easy easy ;D
Whatever you guys decide at least keep the below in mind..
- Place Inline button to the right of the file attachment box.
- Clicking on the button uploads the file and places the code where the cursor is, but doesn't yet submit the post.
- If the button in not clicked then when submitting the post the attachments are saved as standard attachments at the bottom of the post.
- Have the ability to place attachments inline already attached to a post when editing. Make it automatically save and overwrite the existing file somehow if renaming or changing the file is necessary when clicking the Place Inline button.
That's basically it and my feedback for what's it worth. I played around with the other mod last night and those are the issues I quickly found because it won't do the above. From what I saw it's way too limited and wasn't very well thought out.
Take care...
4 is a major issue
1 is a themer decision
In addition, 2 isn't too much of a problem, 3 somewhat more so. But again, why worry about reality? :P
I'm just curious to know who's supposed to implement all this, amongst everything else that needs doing. (Some of you will know my stance on speed of certain things being worked on already, for things monumentally more important than this.)
Quote from: Arantor on May 22, 2014, 07:59:30 PM
I'm just curious to know who's supposed to implement all this, amongst everything else that needs doing. (Some of you will know my stance on speed of certain things being worked on already, for things monumentally more important than this.)
You don't have to do it, but when I saw this topic it hit home because I'm one of those people who uses that specific feature SMF does not currently have. You can simply ignore it or consider it. I'm giving you feedback. Do with it as you want. If its an issue then you should probably just remove this Feature Request forum all together.
The only real issue is the fact that we're treading ground over and over and over... we get it already. We get that you don't have a feature you consider essential. We heard you the first, second, and third times already. And were it up to me, I'd do something about it - except for reasons I'm not about to get into, I personally will not. So you're reliant on the SMF team, of which I am thankfully no longer a member, to implement this - as well as the hundreds of other things that need doing for 2.1. And to keep banging a drum when they already heard you... it really doesn't help your cause. I should know, I've been banging some drums for years and the only way I got change was to do it myself.
I think you have missed the point,W5HRO.
There is no problem with requesting a feature (weell, not for the most part)
the problems occur when users won't listen when the PM or the Devs say no...
Or when they chime in with "I haven't bothered to read the thread, but here's my two cents" (and, as it turns out everything they had to say has been said before and every question they had has actually been answered already)
now - that being said... SMF is open source, dev is open on GitHub and anyone can submit a pull request with code changes, if they care enough to implement something (although there is no guarantee that the devs will accept every request, even if it's well coded)
This is probably the exact reason why a lot of people won't ever come in here and post a request because they know they will get attacked if they do.
I won't post here again...
That wasn't an attack. That was a frustrated sigh from someone that has simply heard your request over and over and over without any sign of what I'm saying being taken on board.
And this is the other issue... the moment someone points out the the user may have been in the wrong, the user immediately calls it "an attaclk" and says "this is why XYZ"
There was no attack in either my post or Arantor's.... just blunt fact. Unfortunately some people are thin skinned and seem to feel that, unless they are coddled and apologized to, it means that the other person is rude or hostile... when the plain fact is that some of us have 18 thousand things to be doing. We are taking time out of our lived to volunteer on theis project and we just don't have time to coddle folks.
No... unless they get what they think they're entitled to, any refusal of any kind is an attack.
The last thing I am is thinned skinned. Ask anyone who knows me ::) I could care less if you were going to do the mod or not and I already said I wasn't going to upgrade anyway so even if you did I still would not have had it. It's all about the way you guys come across and treat people and your last couple of posts are a prime example.
Anyway, spin this the way you want and make yourselves look good. The bad thing is I think this is the best forum software around and it has been well thought out and I would have been willing to help in anyway that I could and contribute, until now.
You are not thin skinned, and yet you have gone into a tizzy about something that was nothing more than a plain spoken, blunt post, so much so that you have picked up your toys and left...
No, that's not acting thin skinned at all....
To be willing to contribute also means actually listening to what people are telling you and not just reiterating the same thing over and over... as you have done here.
Sorry to bring this back up as it seems there is tension in this topic.
Arvacon gave a perfect example below, so I see no need to try and justify anything.
Quote from: Arvacon on January 08, 2014, 02:57:30 AM
+1 from me about these suggestions.
For some forums, like hobby, electronics, machining etc., the pictures are a very big and important part of the description that the members try to present.
Let's say that we have to describe the build of a device, that it has lot of details. Most of times, this will needs at least 10 pictures in one post, to make others see your work and understand about what are you talking about.
If the pictures open like with the Highslide, then it's nice and easy to see them, but if you have just the default system, this is not comfort at all and you start feeling boring to open them one by one. Also sometimes it is nice to watching the photos without need to open them, as it is happening with the ILA, that you can put them into the post in big size and make it looks like a tutorial, with several pictures one under the other and with some description between them, as you analyze your work.
Something else that it would be handy too, is the youtube video links to could be placed as is at the editor and then after posting it, to open the video window without need to use bbcode or extra buttons. For us that we know some things about forums, this seems not important, but you can't imagine how many users are keep asking us about how to do this.. There are a lot of people out there that they don't understand and they ask always how to put youtube links...
Anyway, what I try to say is, these requirements are not because we want our forums to be glamorous. If you see this from the side of the simple user, these things are important for the correct functionality of a community that it has the need of the attachments at the posts.
I can't imagine a forum about machinists, that someone needs help about how to unscrew for example his lathe machine and that the members will have to explain him just with words, or he must describe them how his lathe seems, because for ex. it is difficult to upload 10 pictures at once..
Pictures=1000 words, right? It has nothing to do with elegant and if you want SMF to be on top again, you have to fight for it and improve some things and you must know that we are here and we will continue to support you.
I understand that you try hard about this project all these years and whatever you do it takes a lot of your free time, but isn't it a pity to leave a so many years work to fade out and stay behind of the competition with the pass of time?
Just my 2 cents as you say in America :)
I started with SMF. Then I went to IPB. Then to VB for a long time. I have recently went back to IPB. There is one feature I really like a lot in IPB and that is when you upload your images, you see theie file names in the attachment box on the bottom. You can put your cursor anywhere in your post and then click the insert link next to your list of attachments. It will automatically put the image code right where your cursor was. Very nice feature.
I am not saying that IPB or even any forum is perfect for everybody. They all have something lacking. That's why we have mods. I don't mind using mods. They are there to help tailor our forums to our needs. I use a lot of them.
If 2.1 has been in development for more then 3 years, then I am going to install it to see it in action. Is there a link to where I can see these changes you haven't added yet to 2.1? Realistically. How much extra time would it actually take to make the image handling better? I would like to know the things that you are still working on adding that could be more useful in addition to the things that took 3+ years to implement.
I am interested in this because I've always liked SMF and want to use it again on an upcoming forum. If better image handling is not going to be implemented because you don't think there is enough need for it (we all have our opinions), then that's fine. Do you have any rough idea of when 2.1 will be released?
Since we do this as volunteers, in our free time, we won't/can't give a release timeframe... not even a rough idea.
Basically - it will be released when it is ready. :)
I understand the arguments for inline attachments... don't necessarily agree with them all - but I understand.
That being said... I am not one of the developers nor - even as the PM - can I say to the devs "do this" - since, as noted, we're all volunteers. So, the issue becomes - if this is so desired - WHO is going to do it? Who can do it and has the interest in doing it.
Since we're on GitHub... ANYONE who can code could put together some sort of handling and submit a pull request...
side note: I just noticed that the user who caused a bunch of the drama/tension went and deleted his posts before he ran off in a huff. I have restored them, since this is a conversation, and removing part of the conversation while leaving the responses is uncool.
Thanks. I kind of figured it was more of a "who" kind of thing. I see you have added some really cool features though!
I want to personally thank you all for what you do. Your done, ongoing, and future work is appreciated. I keep coming back here to see how SMF is doing for a reason. Because I like it. Always have. Always will.
The inline (inpost) picture attachment is often needed on my forum. A big wish for 2.1.
Having it as standard feature preferable to using a mod imo (stability, updates etc).